TV’s Best of the Decade: No. 13 — ‘Battlestar Galactica’

We are, I suspect, going to have a bit of a problem here, not with the placement of “Battlestar Galactica” on my list of TV’s Best of the Decade, but with my approach to the series.

During its actual TV run, I watched maybe half-a-dozen episodes of “Battlestar Galactica” and it went under the heading of “OK, but not for me.” I didn’t let it bother me when it made other critics’ annual Top 10 lists. I barely blinked when its finale had many of my best friends in a tizzy in the spring. And when the TCA named it Program of the Year this summer, I hadn’t voted for it, but that was fine.

When it came time to assemble this Best of the Decade list, though, I knew there were a few shows I didn’t watch that probably deserved at least due consideration, but it wasn’t like I was going to be able to plow through all of them in a single month, not while actually doing my job. So I made “Battlestar Galactica” my commitment, prepared to bail early if I reached the end of the first season without rising about respectful ambivalence.

Two things became clear pretty early: The first? I liked “Battlestar Galactica” a lot and it was certainly worthy of a place on this list. The second? There was no frakking chance that I was making it through the whole series in a month. As you may have noticed, I’ve occasionally been doing other things.

I had to choose a stopping or a pausing point where I felt comfortable stepping back and saying, “Yes, I’m still in media res, but here’s where I can take a break and let ‘Battlestar’ breath. For now.”

So here’s where I stand: I’ve made it through the first three seasons, through a miniseries and 53 episodes. And I’m prepared to put “Battlestar Galactica” at No. 13 on my list of TV’s Best of the Decade…

[More after the break…]

I’m not required to be this transparent. You, dear readers, don’t need to know that I didn’t finish “Battlestar Galactica.” I could have talked in circles around the end and glossed over parts of its overall meaning. I mean, I’m gonna finish it. I’m gonna finish it soon. But I wasn’t gonna finish it before finishing this list… I figured I might as well admit it.

So I’m missing the fourth season and depending on which of my respected associates I talk to, that’s either a good thing or a bad thing. I briefly knew the ending in March, but forgot about it since it didn’t matter to me. Some people insist that if I watched the show to its end, “Battlestar” might soar all the way up to No. 1 on my list. Other people insist that if I watch the show to the end, I’d drop it off my list entirely. If you like, I can pretend that I’m splitting the difference between those two extremes.

You can say that this is like walking out of a movie after an hour-and-15 minutes and attempting to write a review. You can say it’s like reading 300 pages of a 400 page book and writing a review.

But TV is journey-driven, not destination driven. This was a fact I’ve tried convincing people when they tell me how horrible the ending for “The Sopranos” was. It’s a fact we may end up having to trot out this May when “Lost” unleashes a finale which, no matter how many answers it provides, will not answer everything. Nothing done in the finale of either show did or could do any damage to the hundreds of hours of previous enjoyment, whereas a stupid ending to a movie or a book can absolutely undo the pleasure of two hours in a darkened theater or a couple weeks of nightstand time.

I promise that when I finish “Battlestar” — assuming commenters here don’t decide to ruin things for me out of sheer belligerence — I’ll write a post updating where the show might be better placed on The List. [I have a couple post-list commitments and follow-ups promised to people.]

I don’t know who the last Cylon is. I don’t know if they reach Earth. And I don’t know where the heck Starbuck vanished for a couple episodes when everybody thought she was dead even though I knew she wasn’t dead. There’s a lot I don’t know.

Without those answers, it’s hard for me to build this posting/essay/article around a central thesis or two, as I’ve tried to do with most of these Best of the Decade entries. But maybe 750 words of transparency, explanation, self-justification and hemming and hawing count as a thesis? Maybe my thesis is how even though I haven’t finished “Battlestar Galactica” and even though placing an incomplete viewing project this high on this list is eating at me, there are obviously enough things about the show that work for me already.

So why is “Battlestar Galactica” here?

Big Ideas.

Genocide. Torture. Biological weaponry. Racism and Xenophobia. Socialism (or an examination of economic disparities and social stratification). Abortion. Capitulation. Legal justice. Blind faith. Democracy. The power of the media. Moving on after unspeakable tragedy (and, by extension, 9/11).

I don’t know that anybody has accused Ronald D. Moore and David Eick of being subtle in their use of subtext and allegory on “Battlestar Galactica,” but the sci-fi genre isn’t one that requires subtly. It mostly requires commitment — figure out what you want to say and use the genre to say it. The show is a portrait of humanity under duress and the question of how far you can go, how many rights and how much infrastructure you can erode, while still maintaining that core of humanity.

At times, “Battlestar” almost seemed to be taking an issue-of-the-week approach, though I prefer the multi-episode examinations of certain topics, especially the ones that require a reexamination of previous assumptions. In that category, I’d place the “We Are The Insurgency” arc that starts the third season, where viewers were asked to identify with the plucky underdogs using suicide bombers and improvised attack strategies to take out the occupying force. It’s like “Red Dawn” only read entirely differently thanks to a new political context. I also appreciated the “Due Process is Important and Terrific” closing to the same season, in Gaius Baltar rotated between smug, Vichy-style capitulator and not-so-noble martyr for justice so many times I got whiplash.

Pragmatism.

There’s something remarkable about how well the “Battlestar” team balanced nearly every argument or moral quandary. I mean, you’re taking issues that in recent American history have become polarizing along political party lines and over the course of a series run, characters are identifying with positions which to us seem politically contrary. We ask questions like “Is Laura Roslin a Democrat or a Republican?” And the answer is “You moron, in this context, nobody had the time or luxury to be party-affiliated, they just make choices based on who they are as characters.” So Laura Roslin’s political choices seem to be both left-leaning and right-leaning, but the way the character was sculpted, they’re neither. They’re just Roslin-leaning.

Because the show relies so heavily on moral and ethical decision-making, nearly every character gets to be the noble hero at some point and nearly every character gets to seemingly be a villain. People’s judgments change situationally. You know. The way they do in life? And there’s character growth as well, because the traumatic events from earlier in the series, the bonds between people, have payoffs later.

I’m actually a bit scared about watching the final season, because I’m afraid that the closing run of episodes may take a side on Gaius Baltar, on Laura Roslin’s politics, on Saul Tigh’s sanity, on Caprica Six’s motives on whether Apollo is his own man or just a whelp with Daddy Issues. The ending of so many of the show’s character arcs couldn’t possibly be as satisfying as the back-and-forth journey. Or could it?

Expansive storytelling.

Credit to Moore and Eick and to the team of directors, led obviously by Michael Rymer, that “Battlestar Galactica” never feels any more claustrophobic than it intends to. Yes, some episodes are mostly people in rooms yelling at each other or staring at computer monitors and getting really nervous, but the show avoided being visually or narratively monotonous.

The secret is mixing things up just enough. In the early episodes, you had Helo and Not-Boomer down on Caprica. It wasn’t like what was happening down there was so exciting. It could have been summed up in a short sentence: “Helo becomes *really* invested in Not-Boomer.” But just being able to go down to Caprica, with its different color tones and different texture allowed viewers an easing-in process. A similar impact was achieved with the New Caprica arc. It got us off of the ship for a while. Even the time on the Cylon ship in Season Three varied the visuals, which was a payoff in and of itself.

Easing background characters into primary roles helps there as well. There’s only so much of Edward James Olmos growling and Mary McDonnell looking wise that any viewer is going to tolerate. So you make Felix Gaeta into a key character for a couple episodes, knowing he can be sent back to his supporting capacity later. He give more time to a Cally or a Dualla, because if the show is only about the Maxim cover models, even that gets boring.

That leads me to…

A better-than-expected cast.

Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell had Oscar nominations. I never really doubted them. I also wasn’t surprised to see good work from Lucy Lawless and Dean Stockwell.

Amusingly, I knew most of the cast from the roles they got after “Battlestar” and in “Battlestar” hiatus. So I was familiar with Pennikett from “Dollhouse” and Rennie from “Harper’s Island” and Sackhoff and Helfer from myriad guest appearances.

I don’t want to make broad generalizations about either the acting level on most Sci Fi Channel shows or about the depth of the Vancouver acting base, but let’s just say the casting directors did a very good job.

Technical assuredness.

The effects in “Battlestar Galactica” get the job done. Period. They aren’t movie-calibre, but I almost never found myself thinking, “Boy, I’m enjoying this show less because the effects aren’t up to snuff.” Tremendous art direction and production design on the ship interiors help to gloss over any limitations in the effects, as did the show’s directors.

Every year, there was a lot of complaining about the absence of Emmy recognition for “Battlestar Galactica,” but that really wasn’t the case. “Battlestar” got regular technical nominations, plus several nods for writing and directing. The only person with a genuine beef, in my opinion, is composer Bear McCreary, who does seem to have been regularly ignored without cause.

My sincere apologies if you don’t think I’ve done full and proper justice to “Battlestar Galactica.” The show’s placement on this list is predicated on my effort to belated give the show its due and finishing the show up is very much on my To-Do list in 2010. I’m trying!

For now, “Battlestar Galactica” stands at No. 13 on my list of TV’s Best of the Decade.

Coming up tomorrow? A show that has managed to survive far longer and to offer more surprises than we ever would have guessed when we first arrived on the Island.

Join The Discussion: Log In With

“Nothing done in the finale of either show did or could do any damage to the hundreds of hours of previous enjoyment, whereas a stupid ending to a movie or a book can absolutely undo the pleasure of two hours in a darkened theater or a couple weeks of nightstand time.” I’m not following you here. How are these cases any different? There are plenty of books and movies that are “journey-driven”. Second, this kind of seems like it contradicts your policy of letting lower-quality later seasons of a show affect its standing on the list. What’s the difference between a bad 5th season and a bad finale, other than a bad 5th season plays out longer?

FTR, I’m one of those that liked the BSG finale.

By: dan

12.19.2009 @ 8:28 PM

lylebot – The primary reason is because a stand-alone book or a movie is composed as a single, arced narrative. At some point, the person had control over the beginning and ending at the same time and had the ability to create a through-line between them. Some TV writers begin a season knowing where the season ends, but very few would tell you they know the three season or five season or eight season arc for the show and even if they do, the chances are good that it will be changed as the story progresses. Yes, a book is a journey. Yes, a movie is a journey. But for the most part, the writer of a screenplay either knows what he’s building to the whole time or can then work backwards and retrofit the rest to his ending. A TV writer can’t do that. Does that make sense? -Daniel

By: dan

12.19.2009 @ 8:29 PM

Oh and this list is subjective. Over 31 picks, I’m going to contradict myself and be hypocritical more than a few times. All I can do is go with my gut and then try to explain myself… -Daniel

By: tigger500

12.19.2009 @ 10:34 PM

I personally think Season 4 is self-indulgent trifle. Also – there is no way in hell Battlestar, as good as it is, is better than Buffy. I don’t care what Joss says. lol

By: BugKiller

12.19.2009 @ 10:45 PM

tigger,

Season 2 of BSG is every bit the equal of Season 5 of Buffy, Seasons 4 and 5 of Seinfeld, Season 4 of The Wire, Firefly, and the rest of the single best seasons in tv history.

As much as I love Buffy, and I LOVE Buffy so much I do the Snoopy Dance… BSG is a superior show in every way.

IMHO. Hehe.

By: tigger500

12.19.2009 @ 10:52 PM

Bug

Yea, I’m sorry. BSB devolves in that last season into a thought experiment for its creators. I didn’t buy, like, or care about a single thing that happened in that season. I guessed the final cylon pretty quickly and that “reveal” was not paid off in any way.

Sure the first two seasons of BSG are as good as any season of Buffy, but the last two are barely as good as Season One of Buffy.

By: BugKiller

12.19.2009 @ 11:41 PM

That is where we really disagree.

While we can say that season 3 can suffer from too many episodes, and even one particularly bad episode of season 2, you know which one…

… there is not one ounce of season 4 I don’t love.

Everything comes together and makes sense.

I personally love the fact that RDM is not scared to say that in this vast and infinite universe, it is impossible to believe that everything is just random, that there is something more.

Whether it’s God, or a divine presence simply watching us, or even if it’s just the divine spark in every human soul and nothing more…

To claim that there is NOTHING out there, is human hubirs on the grandest scale.

I always find it interesting that people who believe in God sometimes don’t believe in life out there, and those who believe in life out there sometimes refuse to believe in the divine.

Kind of like how pro choicers are generally anti death penalty.

Shakespear said it best:

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

And that is the crux of Season 4. And I applaud RDM for it.

Remember, HIS Star Trek, DS9, is the only Star Trek to deal with religion, while the other ST series take an atheist, pro-science point of view.

Moore was able to deftly weave science and faith now in two of the best sci fi series of the last quarter century.

Yes, I am saying that DS9 is far, FAR superior to the bore that was TNG.

Moore’s efforts get to the heart of the human condition in the best example of what sci fi is supposed to be.

There are many, such as Lucas and the creators of the God-awful Star Gate series, who could take lessons from RDM.

As an adendum: who wouldn’t want to see RDM and The Whedon partner on a series?

I think my head would explode!

By: tigger500

12.19.2009 @ 11:58 PM

Eh…Season 4 was boring. And all that you are saying is probably true, but I felt he manipulated the characters to make these grander points. It turned me off immensely.

But yes, I’d love to see Ron Moore and Joss collaborate. Throw in Tim Minear and it’d be bev

By: BugKiller

12.20.2009 @ 12:21 AM

There’s already been some writer and actor swapping by these guys (who do they think they are, swinging suburbanites in the 1970s?), so it makes sense.

I mean, Jane Espensen is running Caprica for Frak’s sake!

Here’s what they need to do:

Get the best of who they’ve had (Fury, Goddard, Minear, and themselves) writing and the best that they had acting (James Marsters, Anthony Head, Tahmoh Peniket, Katee Sackhoff, Grace Park, Dean Stockwell, Tricia Helfer, Michael Hogan, and Alan Tudyk) who don’t currently have shows (damn Nathan Fillion, Adam Baldwin, and Alyson Hannigan!) and create the greatest television show known to man.

I mean please, for the love of GOD… someone get Michael Hogan back into a television show!

By: dan

12.20.2009 @ 12:46 AM

BugKiller- The show with those writers and those stars, how many episodes do you reckon it would last? I mean, me? I’d watch every darned episode of it, but I’m reckoning it’d get cancelled after… 11 episodes? — Daniel

By: tigger500

12.20.2009 @ 2:19 AM

Don’t forget Emma Caulfield!

Dan’s right. It wouldn’t last. But i’d watch it, daggone it!

By: BugKiller

12.20.2009 @ 3:19 AM

Dan & Tigger,

That’s an easy answer. Don’t put it on FOX.

Put it on SyFy or The CW.

By: Gregory Ellwood

12.19.2009 @ 8:18 PM

I would just retort that a number of Hollywood CG guys would tell you many times the effects in BSG were better in some big screen blockbusters and that Olmos and McDonnell were clearlly snubbed for both Emmy, SAG and Golden Globe nominations because it was Sci-Fi. But the rest, can’t argue. Although curious if you like the end.

By: dan

12.19.2009 @ 8:22 PM

There isn’t a single year that I can’t look at the Best Actor and Best Actress in a drama category and see a half dozen (or more) snubbed actors who were every bit the equal of Olmos and McDonnell, so there’s nothing about their snubbing that says anything was “clearly” because of Sci Fi or anything else. Or are Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton of “Friday Night Lights” being snubbed every year because “FNL” is also mysteriously a Sci Fi show? Emmy and Golden Globe voters have a wide variety of prejudices and preferences… -Daniel

By: Oldies2822

12.19.2009 @ 9:07 PM

I really also was happily surprised at how good the show was. However, I noticed a few mistakes (not to complain, just being obsessive compulsive): You listed Jamie Bamber twice on the cast list you were surprised by; the third paragraph under the “Expansive storytelling” section, where you wrote “So you find make Felix Gaeta into a key character for a couple episodes, knowing he can be sent back to his supporting capacity later”, do you mean to say that so you make …? Thanks for the article, really enjoying the series

By: BugKiller

12.19.2009 @ 9:09 PM

This show is number one, meaning, is the rest of your list irrelevant?

Whew… you already know how I feel about The Sopranos, which is still, to this day, one of the most overrated shows in the history of television. Not because it was bad. It’s good. It’s just not as good as the Emmys and the critics and fans made it out to be.

Galactica is BETTER than the volume of critical praise it’s received. Far better. The best writing. The best ensemble acting. The best effects in television history. And the best, most truthful story of what it means to be human and the most honest look into the human condition. Which is what the best of scifi can offer us, as opposed to, say, the ridiculousness of 4 of the 6 Star Wars films.

And Dan… Kara WAS dead. Her arc can be considered to be kin to Christ. She died. She was resurrected. But by whom and to what purpose?

Season 4 was brilliant. And the ending was brilliant and perfect in many ways.

Dan, the one thing many people who hate the ending talk about is the overt religiousity of it all.

To these people, this question must be asked: WHAT FRAKKING SHOW DO YOU THINK YOU’VE BEEN WATCHING???

I feel bad for the atheists out there who refuse to see that in a world of future technology and science run amok (because of a lack of moral oversight, maybe, just maybe?), that you can also inject spiritualism.

Which is what Galactica did from the beginning. The people who hated the ending obviously had no real clue what kind of show they were watching, or tuned out the part that didn’t jibe with whatever personal ideoligical or religious beliefs they held too closely, maybe.

The best thing about Galactica is it never took sides.

It wasn’t Glenn Beck. It wasn’t Richard Dawkins. It wasn’t Billy Graham. And it sure as hell wasn’t Jon Stewart or Keith Olbermann.

It was all of them and none of them. Exposing the truths about OUR WORLD through the world of the Colonies, and doing so by exposing the lies, the truths, being non-judgmental, and asking the hard questions we so seldom are willing to ask ourselves.

Ronald D. Moore was able to shine a light into our darkest corners and find hope and faith and a warning for the future.

And as any good student of history would, I was hooked once I heard, “This has all happened before, and it will all happen again.” The cycle of time is real, it exists through our history, and I loved how RDM explored this concept.

The number 1 show of the decade, if not all time, is BSG.

By: BugKiller

12.19.2009 @ 9:12 PM

Plus… BSG is Joss Whedon’s favorite show ever, and an obvious inspiration for his (now) excellent Dollhouse.

And if BSG is good enough to be The Whedon’s Number 1… then it is good enough to be ALL of our number 1’s.

SO SAY WE ALL!!!

By: dan

12.20.2009 @ 12:48 AM

BugKiller– My main question: Where is “Pardon the Interruption” on Joss’ list? – Daniel

By: BugKiller

12.20.2009 @ 3:32 AM

As much as I love Whedon’s shows, he is a bit of a wine and cheeser.

If he watches sports, it’s probably tennis or something.

By: katLOVESscifi

12.21.2009 @ 12:25 AM

SO SAY WE ALL!

By: WhatTheFDidIDo

12.20.2009 @ 12:25 AM

Personally I think considering your personal opinions that after viewing the last season you would bump the show up a few spots on your list. Its not the greatest conclusion to a series, but as you said its more about the journey, and BSG’s end game is a very solid, satisfying ride.

By: honk_mahfah

12.20.2009 @ 8:04 AM

I’m currently in the process of finally working my way through “The Sopranos,” having previously seen only the sixth season. I’ve now seen everything except for season five. I don’t think it was the least little bit overrated. On my list of personal favorite shows, I’d say I like “Deadwood,” “Lost,” “Battlestar Galactica,” and “Mad Men” slightly more, but only those, and those not by more than a hairsbreadth. The last episode I watched was “Whitecaps,” which just on its own merits is better than most movies, to say nothing of how much better it is than most television. Overrated? Nope, not from where I’m standing. (While we’re at it, I thoght the finale was awesome, and I loved — not tolerated, or accepted, but LOVED — the “Galactica” finale also.)

By: katLOVESscifi

12.21.2009 @ 12:24 AM

THANK YOU FOR PUTTING BSG ON YOUR LIST! Sci-Fi (SyFy) did an amazing thing in getting BSG on the air (THANK YOU Ron & David) and giving people a whole other world to immerse themselves in. I was astounded with the show after watching an hour-long recap between Season 2 and Season 3, and had to catch up quick, and I have been a fool to do otherwise. I am a fan of the show, and always will be. BSG changed Sci-Fi.

By: Ron

12.27.2009 @ 1:01 AM

Dear Daniel,

I disagree on surten points though my compliments for giving your view on BSG.
I watched the entire show except for the webepisodes. When I was watching the final episode I got a feeling which I never got with any show before.. the ending is what makes this show as good as it is, I admit during its 4th season theire ups and downs but the final makes up for all that! The ending reminds me of the Matrix, finally getting out of the loop… I think you should watch the 4th season and review your text.